Justice Committee on March 28th, 2007
Evidence of meeting #58 for Justice and Human Rights in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was police.
A recording is available from Parliament.
On the agenda
MPs speaking
Also speaking
- Wallace Craig Retired Judge, As an Individual
- Edward Ratushny Professor, Common Law Section, Faculty of Law, University of Ottawa, As an Individual
- Tony Cannavino President, Canadian Police Association
- William Trudell Chair, Canadian Council of Criminal Defence Lawyers
- David Griffin Executive Officer, Canadian Police Association
5:05 p.m.
President, Canadian Police Association
At the beginning of my presentation, I talked about the commitment of police officers to their society and their community. One important aspect of their work has to do with their training. From the outset, they are taught to be honest, upright and impartial. When they arrive at the scene of an incident, they must not have any bias with respect to the individuals involved. They must be objective and see what is happening. They then gather the information and gradually come to some conclusion about the incident and the way it occurred. They are taught in their training to be objective.
We have seen police officers sit on boards of directors or on committees on ethical matters and other matters as well. They must be objective and analyze the case before them. Police officers are not excluded from selection boards. They conduct interviews; they are familiar with the process. They follow the rules. At the first meeting, they are told how the committee works, and they follow that procedure.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
Larry Bagnell Yukon, YT
Thank you.
I think the police do a tremendous job. But that's not the issue here, so I won't talk about the police.
I have one question, and then I'll give the rest of my time to Monsieur Ménard.
I think that the independence of the judiciary—relative independence—is one of the reasons Canadians have such great confidence in the system.
I have a simple question for each of the four witnesses: do you believe in the independence of the judiciary? That's how I'll make my decision.
5:10 p.m.
Chair, Canadian Council of Criminal Defence Lawyers
It's sacrosanct to our society, and that's what the concern is.
5:10 p.m.
President, Canadian Police Association
For us, it's the same thing. And we know it won't be tainted with our representatives.
5:10 p.m.
Prof. Edward Ratushny
Absolutely.
5:10 p.m.
Retired Judge, As an Individual
Could I get the question again, please?
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
5:10 p.m.
Retired Judge, As an Individual
Well, the independence of the judiciary is virtually a constitutional guarantee. It is the right to a term that is tenured until retirement. You can't be fired. You have no boss. You are at absolute liberty to speak as you wish in rendering any decision that is privileged. There is an adequate salary. Everything about the judicial appointment—
This process you're going to debate is the only opportunity you have to look at them and ask whether this is going to be a good judge. You're stuck with them for the next 30 years—or 40 years sometimes.
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
5:10 p.m.
Retired Judge, As an Individual
But there's no question that Canadian judges are absolutely independent.
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
March 28th, 2007 / 5:10 p.m.
Conservative
5:10 p.m.
Bloc
Réal Ménard Hochelaga, QC
I would like to thank Mr. Bagnell, but I am not asking for special treatment. I am simply asking that everyone be given equal time. I will raise a point of order at the end of our meeting.
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
